 Craig Paulsen |
Southern Cal needs wedding photographers! Shortage of wedding photographers. I just spent my whole day and part of my night talking to brides. They had left me messages throughout the week and today I finally had a chance to call them all back. Out of 7 brides & grooms I could only book one, but only because its in Sept 2007. The rest of the dates were already booked. 3 of them were high end(ouch). If anyone is serious about being a wedding photographer, I would seriously think about moving out here. The are alot of high end customers. Brooks institute is out this way also, so you could learn and earn on the weekends. If it is your true joy to make fantastic pictures, you'll get there Craig
|
|
|
|
||
|
Cyndee Wanyonyi |
Any desire to fly a photographer in from Boise, ID? :). Cyndee ><>
|
|
|
|
||
|
x |
Wow Craig. No shame, eh? There are thousands within a short drive. The LA market is so oversaturated that it's plain silly. You know this. Come on dude. Just because you were booked. I looked at your website and your prices. Your cheap, that's why. In LA, you have to sell an AVERAGE of about $4,500 per client (considering about 30 to 40 per year) to survive. Most of the photog's here START at $4,500 with very little offered in their packages. To get what clients want, they usually have to get in the $6k to $7k range. So, they do a ton of shopping around to save money. All the $1,200 photog's are getting all that biz, but they can't do it that cheap very long. And, many wise brides know that that is quite an odd disparity in pricing. It is not a saturated market at all. In fact, it's quite the opposite. And, when the housing market falls here, it's going to get much, much worse. Also, there are some large corp-type places eating up the low and middle end people, like Bella. So, what's left? In a few years, there will be high-end botiques and large photo mills. Not much in between. It's sad for the bride who can't afford much. It's like Olan Mills doing weddings. YIKES! I know you're pushing your school or whatever, which is fine. No problem. I'm glad someone is educating photographers instead of them just buying a 20D, a lens, and a 580EX and going for it. But, don't mis-represent the truth for profit. You owe it to people who are taking your word. The LA market is one of the most cut-throat, difficult, and over-saturated markets in the countries. It's like saying you are going to move to New York to be a fashion photographer. Yeah right. OK. No competition there.
|
|
|
|
||
|
x |
"It is not a saturated market at all." Meant to say, "It is not a easy market at all."
|
|
|
|
||
|
x |
Also, you're based out of NYC, I'm not sure what you are doing over here in the LA/OC area. NY too saturated? It is here too. Just different, but kinda the same.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Craig Paulsen |
You got the wrong Craigy. I've done my homework before coming over here from Miami. From San Fran down to San Diego I've found only about 200 great photographers and that was my reason for starting my schools. Yes, I know there are alot of people who think they can just buy a camera and shoot weddings, but they will fold soon enough when word gets out. My minimum package starts at $5,900 so I don't considcer myself that cheap and all that they get is the photography. The rest is ala carte. The market always looks overcrowded, but when you start weeding through all the amatuers you find only a handfull of real photographers. About a year after I started I didn't think that I was anywhere near professional, but I started doing expos and couldn't believe what was out there.
|
|
|
|
||
|
x |
I agree with you on that. I've been waiting for an enterprising mind to come along and train people for this. I see people come and go so fast because they think making $1,200 per wedding shooting digital is killer money. They quickly find out that they can't even shoot a wedding at cost at that price point, the smart ones figure it out and do something, the not so smart ones wind up getting in over their heads and wind up not being able to deliver for their clients. These are the people that give the whole industry a bad rap because they disappear without delivering anything. Digital is nice, but man is it also expensive. In fact, I'm finding that I really haven't saved much money with the switch from film. With all the back-up, cards, and other things associated, while the cost per wedding has decreased, there are other infrastruture costs that have increased. Spread out those costs over all the weddings, and I'm still in the red from my initial investment into digital from film. While the cost of memory is decreasing, my volume continues to increase. And, now, I cringe everytime a new camera comes out with more MP's. While it's not the MP's I'm after, there are other features that makes them highly desirable.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Craig Paulsen |
I think that 8mp is good enough for weddings, but the bigger LCD screen and full sensor is a temptation.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Cyndee Wanyonyi |
So, in the midst of all the talks of $5,000 weddings, here I am, in Boise, ID, taking a wedding at sometimes only $800 a shot just because I NEED/want the experience. What is your opinion on this? I have to build my portfolio somehow, and I only have five weddings in there...with another 2 comin up wihtin 6 months and hopefully more to come. How do I balance this? When is the appropriate time to raise prices to more "industry standard".
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
In the first place, industry standards are not the same across the country. Consider, for example, the cost of living in Boise and compare it to California. Naturally, it is much higher in CA so wedding photographers need more money just to stay afloat. Compare your prices to what other photographers are charging in your area and go from there. As you get more experience, raise your prices.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Craig Paulsen |
Hey Cyndee, My first wedding was for free, my 2nd was $500, Third I was subcontracted for $200,4th Sub contracted for $500, 5th for $700, 6th for $1050, 7th for $750, 8th for $1550. Then I started comparing myself to others in my area like Kerry mentioned and charged $2,500. I practiced every chance I got, looked at millions of wedding pictures and after a while developed my own style. Andy, my whole collection of digital product ran me over $20,000, but I didn't buy everything at once. I got one new lens after every wedding.
|
|
|
|
||
|
x |
Craig, I started in film, so I had most everything. Just needed bodies, memory, DVD's, computers, software, blah, blah, blah. I still haven't recouped the cost of switching to digital. According to WPPI, it takes, on avg., 12 weddings to recoup your costs of making the switch. I'm not sure that's the whole story. But, I do appeciate the lower lab bill these days.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Craig Paulsen |
well unfortunately, my lenses had to be all replaced because I didn't store them with silica gel and mold started to grow inside. I'll be there April 7-12, unless I get a high end booking temptaion to hold me back.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Craig Paulsen |
Hey Andy, this years WPPI looks like a great opportunity. I might even go for the golf tournie. My brain is so sore after all the info and all the new gadgets running through my head, but I love it. I missed last years because of a 3day booking, how was it? La-vie asked me to help them this year, but I had to decline, I need a break. I might even throw a couple down on the roulette table. Thats how I scored a D-body(took 5 hours and alot of luck) at the 2003 convention. This year I'm hoping to be there with at least 25 of my students ( so far I got 12 on the list)
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||